DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Objections
Claims 10–13, 15, 29–30 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Please use the terms “outer edges” and “filter strips” consistently in claims 10–13, 15 to avoid unnecessary confusion.
Claims 29 is objected because the term “filter strips” should be “the plurality of filter strips”. Please use the term consistently to avoid unnecessary confusion.
The preamble of claim 30 is not consistent with the other claims.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 18 and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 18 is indefinite because the term “the filtration layer” lacks antecedent basis.
Claim 30 is indefinite because the term “the open ends of the pleats” lacks antecedent basis.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102(a)(1)
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
The claims are rejected as follows:
Claims 10, 13, 15, 17–18, 20, 23 and 31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Barry et al., US 2019/0262754 A1 (“Barry”).
Regarding claim 10:
Barry discloses that a method of manufacturing and shipping a disposable air filter media (Barry’s method of making filter media element 1010, Barry Fig. 10, [0200]), comprising:
attaching one edge of a first filter strip (where label 1010 points in Fig. 10A of Barry) to an edge of a second filter strip (the other filter strip in Barry’s Fig. 10A) to form two parallel widthwise outer edges and two parallel lengthwise outer edges to define the air filter media (as shown in Fig. 10A of Barry, the two strips forms a square shape, and two read on the claimed widthwise outer edges and the other two reads on the lengthwise outer edges, Barry Fig. 10A, [0200]); and
forming a folding crease (shown in Fig. 10A of Barry) in either the two parallel width outer edges or the two parallel lengthwise outer edges.
Regarding claim 13:
While Barry does not disclose that the method of claim 10, further comprising attaching edges of a third filter strip between the first and second filter strips in the embodiment of Fig. 10A, Barry discloses in a different embodiment of Fig. 47A, where edges of a third filter strip is attached between the first and second filter strips, Barry Fig. 47, [0237].
Regarding claim 15:
Barry discloses that the method of claim 11, wherein the filter strips each include a plurality of pleats (see Barry Fig. 10).
Regarding claim 17:
Barry discloses that the method of claim 15, wherein each of the plurality of pleats is comprised of synthetic filter media (Barry discloses its filter media maybe layered and include materials that are spun bonded, Barry [0189], which means the material is synthetic) having a top filtration layer (Barry discloses as an undulating nonwoven layer Barry [0210]) and a back supporting layer (Barry’s supporting grid fiber layer, Barry [0210]).
Regarding claim 18:
Barry discloses that the method of claim 15, wherein the filtration layer is one of spun fiberglass material, pleated paper, cotton, a synthetic blend, graphite, foam, a flexible metal blend, or cloth (Barry discloses its filter material could be a foam, Barry [0189]).
Regarding claim 20:
Barry discloses that the method of claim11, further comprising folding the air filter media for packing in a shipping container (Barry Fig. 10, [0044]).
Regarding claim 23:
Barry discloses that a method of manufacturing a disposable air filter media (Barry’s process of making its air filter as shown in Fig. 19, Barry Fig. 19, [0209]) comprising:
attaching a plurality of filter strips to each other (Barry’s Fig. 19 show four filter strips, Barry Fig. 19, [0209]), wherein each of the plurality of filter strips include a plurality of pleats made of a filtration layer (as shown in Fig. 19), wherein the filtration layer is one or more of a spun fiberglass material, pleated paper, cotton, a synthetic blend, graphite, foam, a flexible metal blend, or cloth (Barry discloses its filtration layer could be a pleated paper top layer, Barry Fig. 19, [0237]).
Regarding claim 31:
Barry discloses that the method of claim 20, wherein the shipping container is one of a vapor barrier- bag with air, a standard envelope, a Polybag, a Soft Pack, or a standard shipping box (Barry discloses its package could be a soft-walled envelop or bag, Barry Fig. 22B, [0212]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
The claims are rejected as follows:
Claims 11–12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Barry in view of Shearin et al., US 2005/0224170 A1 (“Shearin”).
Regarding claim 11:
Barry does not disclose the method of claim 10, further comprising forming outer edges from the filter strips via a hot press.
In the analogous art of making air filters, Shearin discloses a step of hot press to melt polyolefin compound in the frame to attach the edges of the filter medium to the frame, Shearin [0003]. Shearin discloses its method improves safety, flexibility and greater output capacity, Shearin [0003]. It would therefore have been obvious to forming outer edges from the filter strips via a hot press as disclosed by Shearin for improved safety, flexibility and greater output capacity.
Regarding claim 12:
Modified Barry discloses that the method of claim 11, wherein additional material is provided on the outer edges (Shearin discloses as polyolefin, Shearin [0003]).
Claims 14, 26–28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Barry in view of Bostock et al., US 2001/0015205 A1 (“Bostock”).
Regarding claim 14:
Barry does not disclose that the method of claim 13, wherein the first and second filter strips are joined via one of gluing, sewing, melting, welding, or taping to form a seam between the first and second filter strips.
In the analogous art of foldable air filter, Bostock discloses a plurality of filter strips (Bostock’s central portion 52, first member 54 and second member 54, Bostock Fig. 8, [0048]) joined to each other via bond 55 and 57, Bostock Fig. 8, [0048]. Bostock discloses the bondng could be carried out by welding, adhesive bonding, stapling, sewing, thermomechnical, pressure, or other suitable means and can be intermittent or continuous, Bostock Fig. 8, [0060]. Bostock discloses such bonding means are suitable for securing the end portions, Bostock Id. It would therefore have been obvious for one ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing for Barry’s first and second filter strips to be joined via Bostock’s method because Bostock discloses those method are suitable to join two filter stirps.
Regarding claim 26:
Barry does not disclose that the method of claim 23, wherein the plurality of filter strips comprising a first and second filter strip that are joined v by one of gluing, sewing, melting, welding, or taping to form a seam between the first and second filter strips.
In the analogous art of foldable air filter, Bostock discloses a plurality of filter strips (Bostock’s central portion 52, first member 54 and second member 54, Bostock Fig. 8, [0048]) joined to each other via bond 55 and 57, Bostock Fig. 8, [0048]. Bostock discloses the bondng could be carried out by welding, adhesive bonding, stapling, sewing, thermomechnical, pressure, or other suitable means and can be intermittent or continuous, Bostock Fig. 8, [0060]. Bostock discloses such bonding means are suitable for securing the end portions, Bostock Id. It would therefore have been obvious for one ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing for Barry’s first and second filter strips to be joined via Bostock’s method because Bostock discloses those method are suitable to join two filter stirps.
Regarding claim 27:
Modified Barry discloses that the method of claim 26, wherein the seam enable folding of the filter media for packaging and shipping in a shipping container (as shown in Barry Fig. 20C, [0209]).
Regarding claim 28:
Modified Barry discloses that the method of claim 27, wherein the shipping container is one of a vapor barrier- bag with air, a standard envelope, a Polybag, a Soft Pack, or a standard shipping box (Barry discloses its package could be a soft-walled envelop or bag, Barry Fig. 22B, [0212]).
Claims 16, 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Barry in view of Epli et al., US 2016/0263514 A1 (“Epli”).
Regarding claim 16:
Barry does not disclose that the method of claim 15, wherein the plurality of pleats each include two trapezoid shaped sides joined to form a triangular shape.
However, Barry discloses its pleats are triangular shaped, Barry Fig. 10B.
Additionally, in the analogous art of air filter media, Epli discloses a pleated filter 10, wherein the plurality of pleats each include two trapezoid shaped sides (as shown in Epli Fig. 6). Epli discloses its design is possible to further improve the freedom of shape of its filter bellows, Epli [0010]. It would therefore have been obvious for one ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Barry’s filter pleat to have trapezoid sides as disclosed by Epli to improve the freedom of shape of its filter bellows.
Regarding claim 25:
Barry does not disclose that the method of claim 23, wherein the plurality of pleats each include two trapezoid shaped sides joined to form a triangular shape.
However, Barry discloses its pleats could be triangular shaped, Barry Fig. 10B.
Additionally, in the analogous art of air filter media, Epli discloses a pleated filter 10, wherein the plurality of pleats each include two trapezoid shaped sides (as shown in Epli Fig. 6). Epli discloses its design is possible to further improve the freedom of shape of its filter bellows, Epli [0010]. It would therefore have been obvious for one ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Barry’s filter pleat to have trapezoid sides as disclosed by Epli to improve the freedom of shape of its filter bellows.
Claims 19, 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Barry in view of Wood et al., US 2012/0312735 A1 (“Wood”).
Regarding claim 19:
Barry does not disclose that the method of claim 15, wherein the plurality of pleats are formed in a mold.
In the analogous art of pleated air filters, Wood discloses a method of making pleated filter by a mould tool 10, Wood Fig. 2, [0040]. Wood discloses its design improves moulding process with reduced risk of damaging the filter sheet during moulding, Wood [0012]. It would therefore have been obvious for one ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to use Wood mould tool to make Barry’s pleat for a reduced rick of damaging the filter sheet.
Regarding claim 24:
Barry does not disclose that the method of claim 23, wherein the plurality of pleats are formed using a mold.
In the analogous art of pleated air filters, Wood discloses a method of making pleated filter by a mould tool 10, Wood Fig. 2, [0040]. Wood discloses its design improves moulding process with reduced risk of damaging the filter sheet during moulding, Wood [0012]. It would therefore have been obvious for one ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to use Wood mould tool to make Barry’s pleat for a reduced rick of damaging the filter sheet.
Claims 29–30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Barry in view of Epli as applied to claim 25, and in further view of Shearin.
Regarding claim 29:
Modified Barry does not disclose that the method of claim 25, further comprising forming at least two outer edges perpendicular to the plurality of pleats from the filter strips via a hot press.
In the analogous art of making air filters, Shearin discloses a step of hot press to melt polyolefin compound in the frame to attach the edges of the filter medium to the frame, Shearin [0003]. Shearin discloses its method improves safety, flexibility and greater output capacity, Shearin [0003]. It would therefore have been obvious to forming at least two outer edges perpendicular to the plurality of pleats from the filter strips via a hot press as disclosed by Shearin for improved safety, flexibility and greater output capacity.
Regarding claim 30:
Modified Barry discloses that the method claim of 29, wherein forming the at least the two outer edges by hot press prevents air leakage from the open ends of the pleats during operation (Shearin discloses its hot press process forms a seal, Shearin Claim 1).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to QIANPING HE whose telephone number is (571)272-8385. The examiner can normally be reached on 7:30-5:00 M-F.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jennifer Dieterle can be reached on (571) 270-7872. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Qianping He/Examiner, Art Unit 1776
Prosecution Insights